Tile map hosting - Amazon S3 for me?

Question

Amazon Web Services

There is a task: to place cartographic materials (raster maps) in tile formats (many, many small pictures of 256x256 pixels, there can easily be a thousand of such tiles per unit of square kilometers) on hosting in Europe or the USA.
The total volume is tens and hundreds of GB.
Data will be added in portions of about 1 GB.
Used - in the same way as data is requested from mapping web services (Google maps, Yandex.Maps) - many get-s of these same tiles at the same time. It is still difficult to say exactly how much, but it would be nice if the restrictions in this sense were as mild as possible.

The tiles must be accessible in some constant predefined path with predefined names via HTTP (they are organized into folders with numerical names by scale and coordinates). Accordingly, the situation when content roams around storage farms and before receiving it, the server must still communicate with the hosting and request the current object URL is excluded.

I read about Amazon S3 - in terms of storage conditions and prices - I like it, but somehow I didn’t understand if there was a problem with the object’s permanent URL.

If this service does not meet my requirements, tell me, if possible, which one is suitable (if we are not talking about obvious static hosting).

Answer 1

With S3, you need to remember that AWS charges for

• traffic
• storage
• requests (GET too)

You will have a lot of GET requests, so I don't think S3 is a good fit.
I would suggest taking a look at Rackspace CloudFiles, they don't charge per request: www.rackspace.com/cloud/files/pricing/

Answer 2

urls are static

Answer 3

I recommend asking user korjik if he is actively promoting EC2.

Answer 4

Although I do not like Microsoft, but look towards Azure BlobStorage + CDN. They have better prices and a 3 month trial.